Morocco's Arab Spring Only A Start

By Michael Mainville 

Faced with protests like those that ousted the leaders of Tunisia and Egypt and have shaken much of the Arab world, Morocco's King Mohammed VI made an unusual offer: concessions. And now that voters have massively backed a new constitution curbing his near absolute powers, analysts say the king will need to follow through on promises of democracy to his increasingly demanding people. "The constitutional reform is an opening granted by the monarchy, a measured and controlled opening," said Khadija Mohsen-Finan, a regional expert at the University of Paris. "It may seem enviable in comparison with the rest of the unmoving Arab world, but it is well below the demands of the streets," she said.

Mohammed VI, who in 1999 took over the Arab world's longest-serving dynasty, has faced demonstrations since February after the pro-democracy movement sweeping the region reached his country, the westernmost in north Africa. Using websites such as Facebook and YouTube, the youth-based February 20 Movement has organised weeks of demonstrations that brought thousands to the streets calling for greater democracy, better economic prospects and an end to corruption.

But from the beginning, analysts said, Morocco's Arab Spring uprising was different. "Some reforms were already underway in Morocco and there was a much bigger openness (to dissent) than in other countries," said Mohamed Tozy, a political science professor at Casablanca's Hassan II University, noting that protests were largely allowed to go ahead without interference. "And of course the (protest) movement never questioned the legitimacy of the regime" by calling for the overthrow of the monarchy, he said.

Instead, protesters demanded a constitutional monarchy akin to those in Britain or Spain, with the king becoming the figurehead of a democratically elected government. As the protests grew, the king announced a new constitution under which he would remain head of state, the military, and the Islamic faith in Morocco, but the prime minister, chosen from the largest party elected to parliament, would take over as the head of government. Other changes would grant more power to parliament, introduce an independent judiciary and provide new guarantees of civil liberties.

After a referendum campaign fiercely backed by authorities and in the media, more than 98 percent of voters approved the new constitution on Friday. The February 20 Movement, which had urged a boycott of the vote, immediately denounced the result as a fraud. To be sure, analysts said, the new curbs on royal powers are a long way from making Morocco the kind of democracy protesters are demanding, and the kingdom remains firmly in the control of the monarch and his entourage.

But as a first step - and a moderate reaction in a region where many regimes have cracked down on protesters with gunfire and arrests - Mohammed VI's response has been held up as an example to other Arab leaders. "Opponents say that the changes do not go far enough, or they are simply window-dressing to avoid a revolution," said Joel Hirst, an analyst at the New York-based Council on Foreign Relations. "Nevertheless, the Moroccan response to the unrest in north Africa was a response to the people, it was quick, it was sweeping and it was inclusive," he said.

Still, the referendum and new constitution are only the beginning of a long process, analysts said. "Is the constitution a good framework for Morocco to change, and to change radically? Yes. Will the constitution change Morocco? No. It will depend on the people who will apply it," Tozy said. Morocco's authorities will need to move quickly to show real commitment to reforms, Tozy said, and to fight the main sources of discontent in the country: the concentration of power in few hands, endemic corruption and deep economic disparities.

Tozy said early parliamentary elections will probably be held in October and will need to be fair and transparent to help lead to "the emergence of a new political elite". "(The elections) should be participatory and inclusive," Hirst said. "Then, a new prime minister can help to move forward changes... Revolutions such as Egypt rarely result in positive advances for the people. Gradual, progressively liberal reforms are what is required.

The new constitution may have given Moroccan authorities some breathing room, analysts said, but having had a taste of influence, those anxious for change will jump on attempts to slow down democratic reforms. "Profound change will have to come in the behaviour of the Moroccan political elite much more than stipulations in the constitution," Mohsen-Finan said. – AFP

This analysis was published in The Kuwait Times on 04/07/2011

Street Politics In The West Bank

By Christopher J Lee

On June 5, I witnessed a protest against Israel’s “separation” wall in the West Bank. This non-violent demonstration was organised by Stop the Wall to mark Naksa Day, an annual commemoration of Palestinian displacement after the 1967 Six Day war. Stop the Wall is a grassroots organisation that campaigns to end the new form of Israeli apartheid that has taken hold with the construction of the purported security barrier - reaching up to 8 metres and hundreds of kilometres long.

The mid-day confrontation did not remain non-violent for long. As hundreds of marchers from Ramallah, the seat of the Palestinian Authority (PA), gathered near the traffic circle in front of the Qalandia checkpoint, Israeli police and military wasted no time before firing tear gas into the crowd. This speed of response was frightening. A sense of apprehension informed the day: a few weeks before, the protests of Nakba Day on May 15 had resulted in at least 15 Palestinian dead along the Syrian border. No one knew how far the police and soldiers of the Israeli Defence Force (IDF) were willing to go to disperse the demonstrators.

After the immediate, unwarranted reaction, the push back was for the most part restrained. In contrast to views of Israel’s security being under constant threat, the military units present appeared wholly confident, even blasé, about the situation. Within an hour, the soldiers had secured the roof of a building, from where they could fire tear gas on the crowd with little fear of reprisal.

At this point, the situation evolved into political street theatre. With the IDF unit firmly ensconced in its rooftop position, a handful of young Palestinian men approached from the street to launch stones with homemade slingshots. Taking turns, they taunted the soldiers on the roof with their nimble skills and youthful courage. And when they looked too confident, the IDF fired another volley of tear gas, with Red Crescent ambulances at the ready to help those who had inhaled too much. An eclectic group of photojournalists were in position at the bottom of the building, equipped with gas masks and body armour, ready to capture this iconic image.

But beyond their lenses, the traffic on the other side of the road rumbled on as usual. Qalandia is one of the main checkpoints between Ramallah and Jerusalem, and the stretch of road from Ramallah to Qalandia is one of the busiest in the West Bank. As the protest shut down two of its four lanes, a column of slow-moving traffic—taxis, buses, commercial trucks, private vehicles— formed in the remaining two. Picture this: on one side of the street, a tense political confrontation between the IDF and several hundred protestors; on the other, daily West Bank traffic, barely stymied by the protest. Those Palestinian drivers and their passengers simply wanted to get to where they were going and carry on with their daily lives, and rolled up their car windows whenever another round of tear gas was fired.

I do not mean to undermine Stop the Wall’s protest and its political significance, or to suggest the IDF did not represent a physical threat. A more violent situation could have transpired. Yet the contrasting dynamics of the afternoon offer a more complete picture than the stereotypes of teenage Palestinian boys throwing stones and burning tires which the photojournalists were attempting to capture. It depicts a more complex set of politics among Palestinians than either western journalists or the Israeli government portray.

After several weeks in the West Bank, what became clear to me was the active financial investment in Ramallah, as well as neighbouring cities such as Nablus and Bethlehem. Residential high-rise buildings, university campuses and commercial neighbourhoods in these urban areas all pointed to economic development. This growth reflects the aspirations of many Palestinians to prosperous jobs and social stability amid the endless political negotiations between Israel and the PA. Though these discussions are crucial for the future of the region, they make little daily impression on Palestinian families and communities who have more immediate needs to be met.

It is important to recognise the two sets of politics present at Qalandia that day. The concerns of the drivers and passengers are no less political than the demonstrators directly involved on the other side of the street. In fact, to neglect the politics of everyday life—securing work, food, transportation, housing, education and other daily needs—in the Occupied Territories is to ignore the common vulnerabilities and struggles shared by all Palestinians during, and between, days of political commemoration. The wall symbolises the physical limitations placed on Palestinian communities by the Israeli government, but it does not tell of the strategies and resilience that Palestinians have employed to overcome such measures, to progress socially and economically.

As the time for the possible declaration of Palestinian statehood by September approaches, we should keep this dichotomy in mind, in order to understand the meaning of, and debate over, this option among Palestinians. It is not an either/or choice. The connections between grassroots mobilisation and the politics of everyday life in the West Bank must be addressed to grasp the complexity of popular politics, and what is at stake for whom and when. We must take both stories into account. We must look at both sides of the street.

-This commentary was published in Le Monde Diplomatique on 30/07/2011
-Christopher J Lee is a professor of history at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. He was recently a faculty fellow of the Palestinian American Research Center, an affiliate of the Council of American Overseas Research Centers

The Lebanese Dilemma

By Musa Keilani

As expected, the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL) has issued charges and arrest warrants for the investigation into former Lebanese premier Rafik Hariri’s murder in 2005.

According to Lebanese media reports, the four suspects targeted by the arrest warrants are members of Hizbollah and include Mustafa Badreddine, brother-in-law of top operative Imad Mughniyeh, who was killed in a 2008 bombing in Damascus, Salim Ayyash, a Hizbollah member who holds US citizenship, and Hassan Anise, who has changed his name to Hassan Issa. A similar indictment and warrants for other suspects have been delivered to the Syrian government, but it can be safely concluded that Damascus would not cooperate with the STL, which suspects Syrian officials of controlling the alleged Hizbollah team accused of carrying out the assassination.

It is uncertain what options the government of Hizbollah-backed Prime Minister Najib Mikati has over the STL move, which now calls for the suspects to be put on trial. Hizbollah has 18 seats in the 30-member Mikati Cabinet, which was formed after Hizbollah engineered the downfall of the government of Saad Hariri, son of the assassinated prime minister,in January, when he refused to call off cooperation with the tribunal investigating his father’s murder.

Mikati is not in a position to take an independent decision in the affair because he depends on Hizbollah for the survival of his government, and the group has ruled out cooperating with the STL, which it accuses of being a US/Israeli weapon against it.

Mikati has been given 30 days to execute the arrest warrants. Clearly, he spent about five months making up his government and would have had enough time to contemplate what his response to the STL move should be. His initial response on Thursday was clinical, clearly playingfor time. There was no final word yet on who killed Hariri, Mikati noted.

“The indictments are not verdicts,” he said, and all suspects are innocent until proven guilty.

However, stalling for time might not work, because the US has thrown its weight behind the STL, and so have Western allies.

If the governments of Lebanon and Syria reject the tribunal’s indictments and refuse to extradite the suspects and witnesses named therein for trial in The Hague, they would be referred to the UN Security Council for sanctions to enforce their compliance.

What makes the equation more complicated are the ongoing pro-democracy protests in Syria. The Syrian government has cracked down heavily on the protesters, the result being 1,300 dead, thousands wounded and 15,000 citizens made refugees in Lebanon and Turkey. Damascus has moved on a parallel track to pacify the people and international community by allowing an unprecedented meeting of pro-democracy activists in Damascus last month, but the move was not very convincing. Activists are demanding political reforms that could not be accepted by the regime because compliance will mean rooting out the domination of the Alawite sect in power and exposing its leaders to prosecution by the powers to be in Damascus.

Hence, the Syrian regime is putting up a no-holds-barred effort to fight off the challenge. It remains to be seen whether it will succeed in working out a political solution to the conflict (although it is highly unlikely).

Lebanese political leaders, including those of Hizbollah and others, are closely watching the developments in Syria, since any upheaval there would have an immediate impact on Lebanon.

In the meantime, Iran is trying to muscle its way into the equation. Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has ruled the STL indictment as “null and void” being the work of a Western/Israeli tool seeking to undermine Hizbollah.

The deadlock threatens to plunge Lebanon into a new and violent crisis.

The Lebanese government does not have the military power to challenge Hizbollah (which calls the shots in the government anyway). There does not seem to be any possibility at this point in time that the Hizbollah-dominated government could be brought down and the elements in the equation would be overturned.

On the other hand, analysts cannot overlook the possibility that the Hizbollah members named in the STL charge sheet are not guilty as charged. They could be victims of a frame up or were conned into an Israeli operation disguised as a Syrian-led plot. Doubts still persist over the Hariri assassination. Experts have asserted that there were many loopholes in any theory, implicating Israel or Syria in the killing. They pointed to the sophistication of the bombing that killed Hariri and 22 others. They said that Lebanese agents could not have had access to the technology and equipment that overrode several security precautions for the 16-vehicle Hariri convoy that was decimated in the remote-control bombing.

It has since emerged that all cell phones were demobilised as routine within a one-kilometre radius of the Hariri convoy wherever it went.

There is the hypothesis that since the original technology was Israeli, it follows that the know how to override it and allow a remote-control operation must have come from Israel, and Israel could have used its agents in Lebanon to carry the deadly bombing out. But the most convincing argument is that Israel cannot have done it for one single reason,which is thatHariri had committedhimself to making peace with Israel during his Sevre talks with French and American higher echelons.

In conclusion, the US and its supporters will definitely put up a stiff battle to have the STL order carried out, whereas Hizbollah and its allies can be expected to wage an equally bitter fight against it.

Fuelling the crisis and perhaps dragging Hizbollah into a new war will shake the status quo in the Lebanese political landscape, with the whole region suffering the ramifications.

This commentary was published in The Jordan Times on 03/2011

Perpetrating Racism Of Another Order

The hypocrisy of charging Gaddafi while ignoring crimes of others such as Israel, smacks of double standards

 By Tariq Al Maeena

Arrest warrants were issued last week by the International Criminal Court (ICC) for Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, his son, Saif Al Islam and his intelligence chief, Abdullah Al Sanussi, for crimes against humanity. The three men were charged with murder and persecution under Article 25 of the Rome Statute, which defines the responsibility of individuals criminally responsible for crimes committed against a state.

Libya's Arab spring which is stretching now into the Arab summer has kept newscasters busy. On February 26, the Security Council passed Resolution 1970 putting in place sanctions, travel bans and freezing the assets of the Libyan leader and his inner circle. That was followed by Resolution 1973 in March authorising the use of "all necessary measures…to protect civilians and civilian populated areas under threat of attack…" and established no fly-zones throughout the region after Gaddafi refused to heed the calls of the international community to step down. And now the ICC warrants.

Admittedly, Gaddafi has not endeared himself to his people with his strong-armed and often brutal response to their protests. Nor have his occasional comic outbursts mollified his few remaining allies. But let us pause for some moments and reflect on other crimes that happened not so long ago, crimes that mysteriously remain uncharged and punished. Let us bring to the forefront the crimes against the Palestinian people orchestrated in the not so distant past by Israeli politicians such as Ariel Sharon, Ehud Olmert, Tzipi Livni, Ehud Barak, and continue today under Benjamin Netanyahu, crimes of a holocaust proportion that also targeted the civilians of Lebanon back in 2006.

It was in 2008 when the Israelis released their holocaust against the defenceless people of Gaza when US-supplied Israeli F-16s rained their armaments of death. There was no noise raised by the international community, let alone the ICC. Neither had we heard loud protestations against the use of illegal weaponry in the form of white phosphorous incendiary bombs that resulted in such a great human toll.

Killing the helpless

Writing in Haaretz at the time, Israeli activist Gideon Levy stated, "When the cannons eventually fall silent, the time for questions and investigations will be upon us. The mushroom clouds of smoke and dust will dissipate in the pitch-black sky; the fervour, desensitisation and en masse jump on the bandwagon will be forever forgotten and perhaps we will view a clear picture of Gaza in all its grimness. Then we will see the scope of the killing and destruction, the crammed cemeteries and overflowing hospitals, the thousands of wounded and physically disabled, the destroyed houses that remain after this war. "The questions that will beg to be asked, as cautiously as possible, are who is guilty and who is responsible. The world's exaggerated willingness to forgive Israel is liable to crack this time. The pilots and gunners, the tank crewmen and infantry soldiers, the generals and thousands who embarked on this war with their fair share of zeal will learn the extent of the evil and indiscriminate nature of their military strikes. They perhaps will not pay any price. They went to battle, but others sent them.

"The public, moral and judicial test will be applied to the three Israeli statesmen who sent the Israel Defence Forces to war against a helpless population, one that did not even have a place to take refuge, in maybe the only war in history against a strip of land enclosed by a fence. Olmert, Barak and Livni will stand at the forefront of the guilty. Two of them are candidates for prime minister; the third is a candidate for criminal indictment. It is inconceivable that they not be held to account for the bloodshed."

Well, guess what folks? Nothing ever happened against those individuals. Why? Because they are Israelis and can act with impunity for the western world dare not censure them. They do not have to face the music. The people of Gaza have been in much the same wretched and hopeless state for years. The Palestinians have been continuously starved, attacked and martyred since the occupation began with the latest US-supplied warplanes constantly screaming overhead and provoking further civilian deaths, making the situation more serious and disheartening. A holocaust is being played in front of their eyes and yet the leaders of the West, unlike in their dealing with Libya, remain mum.

Jose Luis Moreno Ocampo, the Argentinian ICC prosecutor since 2003, had never tabled charges for such crimes. Nor has he brought to the fore those responsible for crimes committed against the people of Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan by US forces and their Nato allies.

This is perhaps why it is imperative for us to demand accountability for such war crimes in any which way that happens. The hypocrisy of charging Gaddafi while ignoring the crimes of others smacks of double standards that erode the credibility of the ICC. Angolan Foreign Minister Georges Chikoti was correct when he stated that African countries believe the court is selective in how it assesses or lays charges. Will the ICC heed such words and behave even-handedly?

-This commentary was published in The GULF NEWS on 03/2011
-Tariq A. Al Maeena is a Saudi socio-political commentator. He lives in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia

Lebanon: Hariri Indictments To Widen Political Strife

By Mariam Karouny

Indictments by a UN-backed court seeking the killers of statesman Rafiq Al-Hariri, which Lebanese officials say accuse Hezbollah members, will widen the country's political rift and increase sectarian tension. The long-awaited indictments will embolden the opposition led by Hariri's son, Saad, whose unity government was toppled by Hezbollah and its allies in January after he refused demands that he renounce the tribunal. However, analysts say the increased tension is unlikely to turn violent or lead to a repeat of the 2008 sectarian clashes in which at least 85 people were killed and which brought the country to the brink of another civil war.

Hariri's March 14 coalition, which includes Christian and Druze figures, will step up pressure on Sunni Muslim Prime Minister Najib Mikati, whose cabinet is dominated by Shi'ite Hezbollah and its allies, to hand over suspects. "The opposition is going to be fierce and will be focused on him (Mikati) more than anyone else. They consider him the soft spot in the government facing the Sunni street," Lebanese analyst Nabil Bumounsef said. "He is exposed. The conflict between the opposition and the majority will increase.. March 14 will escalate, he will be in the middle," he added.

Hezbollah, a powerful militant movement supported by Syria and Iran, has for months been at odds with Saad Al-Hariri, backed by the West and the Sunni Arab kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Tiny Lebanon, with around four million people, has always been a battleground for bigger regional powers. Syria, which had a military presence for 29 years until 2005, remains the most influential external player in Lebanon's sectarian politics.

But most regional and international powers which have a say in Lebanon's politics are themselves facing problems and are unlikely to want to shoulder the additional burden of getting embroiled in another Lebanese crisis. Syria's President Bashar Al-Assad, a strong backer of Hezbollah, is struggling to contain a 14-week uprising against his rule, while Saudi Arabia's elderly King Abdullah has already had to address turmoil in neighbouring Yemen and Bahrain. "If you look around you nobody wants a fight. The region is boiling in sectarian tension. So Saudi does not encourage Hariri to spark anything. It is not in its interests," a Lebanese official said.

In Lebanon itself, ordinary Lebanese showed little interest in the indictments handed over on Thursday. Life on the streets was normal on Friday, a contrast from when Mikati was appointed to form the government in January and Hariri supporters took to the streets in protest. "Nobody in Lebanon - the majority nor the opposition - has the interest or the capability to make problems in the street," said Bumounsef.

Hezbollah denies any role in Hariri's killing and has said it will never allow any of its members to be handed over to the tribunal for trial. The content of the indictments, which were not officially released, came as little surprise. Hezbollah leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah said last year the tribunal would target the group, and Lebanese and foreign media had mentioned two of the names which officials say were listed in the indictments. But officials allied to Hezbollah, which say the tribunal is an Israeli tool, said they were alarmed by the timing of the indictments which were handed over as Mikati's cabinet, which was formed just two weeks ago after months of wrangling, met to agree its policy statement.

Lebanese governments traditionally deliver a policy statement before heading to parliament for a vote of confidence. The vote is expected next week. "It is clear that the tribunal works based on politics. Its indictments and everything else related to it are designed to deliver a message," said one of the officials. "They wanted to sabotage the government and put it in an awkward position." The carefully-worded statement "stressed the (importance of) truth in the crime against Rafiq Al-Hariri" and said it would monitor the progress of the court. Mikati urged Lebanese to be "reasonable and far-sighted" to ensure that "those who want to target the country and push us towards strife miss their chance".

The 2005 assassination of Hariri, seen as a Sunni leader, plunged Lebanon into a series of crises which included killings, brief internal fighting and a 34-day war between Hezbollah and Israel in 2006. The main question is whether Lebanon is going to hand over the suspects for trial. Hezbollah, which is both a political party and a heavily armed group, is highly secretive about its military wing, making the mission of security forces to find the suspects - let alone arresting them - almost impossible. "The group will not confront the state. If they want them, they need to find them first," said a Hezbollah ally.

Few people have heard of the names of the suspects or know exactly what positions they hold, even though two of them are believed to be senior figures. Even fewer people know if they were inside Lebanon. Interior Minister Marwan Charbel said Lebanon will cooperate with the tribunal, but held out little prospect that the security forces would track down suspects. "We can implement (the indictments) in the ways we see appropriate," he said. "There are many wanted people in Lebanon. We raid their place of work and residences and we don't find them, but we are carrying out our duties. We will go and raid and if we find them we will bring them and if we don't find them we will tell the judicial authorities we did not find them.

Lebanon has 30 days to try to carry out the arrests. If no one is arrested the defendants can be tried in absentia. Hezbollah officials declined to comment but Nasrallah was expected to give a speech yesterday. The Future Movement, which is led by Hariri, said after meeting on Friday that it will vote against Mikati's government when parliament meets next week. It said it considered the government's policy statement as a "coup against the tribunal" and said it "drags Lebanon into the trap of deepening the internal division and confronting the international community". – Reuters

This analysis was published in The Kuwait Times on 03/07/2011

Yemen... A Country Still Saleh Priority

By Ahmed Al-Jarallah

Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh still prioritizes national interest over anything even if he is in a serious health condition. This was evident in a message he conveyed recently to the Yemeni stakeholders, through Foreign Affairs Minister Abubakar Al-Qurba. He urged them to be optimistic about the Gulf initiative, start the national dialogue, and end the impasse. This message showed that Saleh, who was injured in a terrorist attack which forced him to leave the country for awhile to undergo treatment, remains a force to be reckoned with. The attack did not weaken his political position and popularity, prompting millions of Yemenis to express their solidarity with the president a few days ago. His instructions in favor of the Gulf initiative do not entail succumbing to pressures from the opposition protests or the assassination attempt.

Saleh has responded to the demands of the citizens, especially his supporters who are part of the Yemeni equation. The incidents have proven that the pro-government protesters form the majority with a single agenda. They have right to perform their national roles like numerous other factions, which find it difficult to come up with a unified stand; hence, prolonging the impasse. The president has reaffirmed his plan to push for the peaceful transition of power through the constitutional institutions. He has taken this step to prevent political vacuum that might lead the country towards the unknown.

The opposition parties in Yemen have introduced many programs and discussed several agendas. However, the citizens and other regional countries do not support these agendas. This necessitates dialogue under the Gulf initiative to lay down an acceptable unified national agenda to address the problem. It is also vital to approve the proposed formation of a government of national unity (GNU), consisting of the opposition and the ruling Popular Conference Party. This will yield the desired results in terms of sustainable stability in Yemen and strong coordination between all institutions to rectify lapses. The wicked power blocs intend to take advantage of the lapses to transform Yemen into a terrorist backyard and launch pad for attacks on neighboring states to create another Somalia.

Undoubtedly, Saleh will leave an indelible mark in history if he remains firm in his stand to ensure that all institutions work properly while he hands over power to the appropriate people at the right time and responds to the demands of the citizens; thereby, putting the interests of the nation on top of his priority list.

-This commentary was published in The Arab Times on 03/07/2011
-Ahmed Al-Jarallah is the editor-in-chief of The Arab Times and of the Kuwaiti Daily Assyassah

Syria And The Friday Of Departure

By Tariq Alhomayed

What does the so-called Friday of Departure [1/7/2011] in Syria – 4 months after the beginning of the uprising – tell us? Simply speaking, it tells us that the Syrian regime has yet to learn its lesson, whilst the Syrian street…yes, the street…is more flexible, informed, and developed, and knows what it wants.

The outbreak of wide-spread protests across Syria, with more than half a million protestors taking to the street in Hama, means that the Syrians are insistent upon [political] change, and are not backing down in the face of brutal suppression or political tricks. More importantly than this, the ceiling of the Syrian street's demands have been raised even further, with these demands now outstripping those being put forward by others, whether this is the Syrian [political] opposition that met last Monday in Damascus, or the political solutions being proposed by foreign powers. The ceiling of Syrian street's demands were not raised to this level in one go, but rather these demands developed step-by-step, which is precisely what happened in Egypt as well. However the former Egyptian regime – as I have stated in previous articles – delayed, and were ultimately three days too slow in responding to events as they unfolded…however the al-Assad regime today is approximately 40 years too slow.

We must credit the Syrian demonstrators today for showing unprecedented discipline despite everything that the al-Assad regime is throwing at them, for there is no violence, or sectarianism, or sabotage, or the outbreak of looting and rioting, regardless of whatever the al-Assad regime says about the presence of Islamist gunmen. This is an unconvincing story, whether we are talking about the Syrian regime's claims, or the Libyan regime's claims [of the presence of Islamist gunmen]. We are all aware that suicide operations are one of the key features of Al Qaeda-sponsored terrorism, and this is something that has been clear since the establishment of this terrorist organization. Therefore Al Qaeda only carries out terrorist operations in this manner, because suicide operations represent an inexpensive form of terrorism. Of course, the fear now is of suicide operations taking place in Syria, allowing the Syrian regime to say "See…Al Qaeda is here!" However before the ridiculous [Syrian] security apparatus attempts to fake such an attack, we must also recall that Al Qaeda usually targets "soft targets" such as crowded places, mosques, hostels, and even funerals. This is also something that we have not seen, either in Syria or Libya. In addition to this, the presence of Al Qaeda in Syria would represent a condemnation of the regime, not the demonstrators, for how could Al Qaeda be present in a police state such as Syria?

Therefore, the Syrian regime's mistakes, and its reluctance [to implement reform] has brought it to this current crisis point, or shall we say impasse. Indeed the only thing that the Damascus regime excels at is never learning from its mistakes, or from weaving futile plots. However the Syrian protestors are the complete opposite of this; they are attentive and well-organized, and now have a clear depth. A report published by the New York Times [Syria Pulls Its Armed Forces From Some

Contested Cities, 29/6/11] quoted one Syrian political activist in Hama as saying that "we learned from our mistakes", he added that "to make a revolution halfway is to dig our own tombs." Therefore, there is nothing surprising about half a million Syrian citizens taking to the street in Hama, for they have broken through the fear-barrier, and know how to tire out the Syrian security apparatus. At the same time, it is clear that the Damascus regime has not learnt from its mistakes, and has never acknowledged that the only solution to this crisis is reform, namely to implement a package of reform that meets the people's demands. However even this is something that is no longer possible today, because the Syrian regime has delayed for too long, and so it would be very difficult to implement this. Therefore today it is clear – for the first time since the beginning of the uprising – that the Syrian people have the upper hand, not the regime, and one US official speaking to the New York Times on the condition of anonymity stressed that "time is on the opposition's side."

-This commentary was published in Asharq al-Awsat on 02/07/2011
-Tariq Alhomayed is the editor-in-chief of Asharq al-Awsat